Rising Above ‘Politicised’ Football in Zimbabwe: #DeMbare #Bosso

By Takura Zhangazha*

The recent football match between two Zimbabwe soccer giants, namely Highlander’s FC and Dynamos FC in Bulawayo this weekend reminded me of a book I once read.  It is titled ‘Bulawayo Burning: The History of a Southern African City, 1893-1960.” 

It was written by a British born historian who we historically respect as Professor Terrence Ranger. Mainly because it also turns out he was progressively involved in our national liberation struggle as both an intellectual as well as a close comrade to a number of our liberation war heroes either side of the Zanu Pf or PF Zapu divide.  Including being one of the first British intellectuals to interrogate the development of African nationalism(s) as they related to our First Chimurenga liberation struggle. 

In the book I cite above, Ranger has a chapter where he outlines the evolution of the football club that has now come to be known as Highlanders’ FC.  From it being initially being referred to as Lions FC through to its emblematic meaning as it reflected identity. Also as preferred and promoted by emergent settler colonialism. 

What is however apparent in his historical narrative, which he dedicates to the late amazing novelist Yvonne Vera, is the rich historical diversity of the city of Bulawayo.  Based on the fact that the white settler colonialists assumed it to be not only the key to conquering their newly established territory but also its economic proximity to divided Boer and English South Africa.

In the then Salisbury (now Harare) though with scant academic literature and knowledge, Dynamos FC also emerged based on its moniker ‘DeMbare’ from the African township that came to be initially known as Harare and then eventually Mbare district.   

The politics that happened in between are for some other academics to crosscheck.  What was important is the reality that Zanu Pf or PF Zapu had always instrumentalized football supporters for specific political causes.  But even then, this was also borrowed from the Rhodesian propaganda machinery where they would use one urban and historical ethnic group against the other.   

But back to contemporary local football.   

I now argue with some of my brothers and sisters including those based in rural areas about the English premier league.  I am a Liverpool FC supporter.  A majority of them support either Manchester United or Chelsea FC.  We laugh about all these teams also based on whether our fathers and mothers currently (if they are alive) or used to support.  We do not fight or invade pitches. We still call it the “beautiful game”.  And because we are in the global south, after the satellite broadcast matches it will be late and we have to go to sleep. 

Indeed if we are in social conversations we may fight over television remotes about what match to watch but in the final analysis we do not carry goal posts or tear goal nets.  Neither do we generally assume political connotations to football matches even if they are as far away as they are in the global north.  Particularly if it’s the UEFA Champions League or the World Cup. 

But I would understand why Ranger also wrote his brilliant archival narrative on what occurred in Bulawayo beyond the football.  Or why the amazing Japanese scholar Tsuneo Yoshikuni also wrote a brief but brilliant history of Mbare. It was probably in order that we do not repeat “bad history”.

Especially via that which should bring us together in the form of sport.  Even at the highest levels as ‘competitive sport’. 

But I know there are some cdes that prefer what I personally consider a regressive alternative.  One that insists on a sporting culture that puts politics above its sporting necessity.  I have problems with that. But I do not run sporting associations.  I just share my opinions to whoever wants to read/know them. 

We need to rise above political assumptions of the meaning of football.  If we insist on it, it does not help.

Some among us believe proximity to the state helps their causes.  Others believe whispering in the ears of international football authorities is better.  The key questions we have to ask are twofold.  Firstly, if it can be a beautiful game globally why can it not be one in Zimbabwe?

Secondly, why must we always wear our egos about sports administration on our sleeves yet we, in the majority of cases never played sport beyond high school.  In Zimbabwe. 

Those that run two of the most historically significant football clubs in Zimbabwe, Highlanders FC and Dynamos FC, need to get their act together and think beyond their personal tenures and a new progressive football culture that must be constructed.  Internally and externally with their fans. 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com) 

 

Zimbabwe’s Financial Stand-Off: Who's Holding Whom to Ransom?

By Takura Zhangazha*

Following the recent abrupt changes to Zimbabwe’s financial system as announced by the government and the Reserve Bank, I was asked if I was going to write an opinion on the matter.  I initially responded by saying as an irregular blogger I tend to stick to my lane.  Mainly because I am not a finance, economics or banking expert and therefore I am least likely to put together around 700 words on the matter. Neither am I emotional about it.   

Then I changed my mind.  As a typically highly opinionated Zimbabwean. This was mainly because of the fact that the nature of the discourse around this matter appears to be linear.  Ideologically and in relation to assumptions of received ‘best practice’ business, financial and economic policy knowledge.  

Where it concerns ideology it should be self-evident the discourse around what the government and the central bank can do is couched in what ‘free market’ finance, business and economics require.  And how assumedly the state is ‘ridiculously’ going against the grain.  In this are included arguments such as ‘let the market decide' or the ‘state has no business in business’ or ‘just dollarize!’  Arguments that are the equivalent of a relatively blind ‘praise and worship’ session for capitalism.  Particularly a capitalism we do not own.  But instead want to demonstrate an 'other based ' knowledge of it for reasons I will come back to later.

The astounding issue is that it is those that are most disadvantaged by the 'free market' that are appearing to defend it. Especially on social media platforms, in mainstream media, some trade unions, civil society organisations and political parties, inclusive of the ruling one.  Yet they are not ones who have been at the foreign currency auction system.  Nor are they the ones who are complaining about in- country or offshore shareholder profit margins that must be maintained while ensuring there is no minimum wage for workers.  It is not only ironic but reflective of a tragic national economic consciousness that misses the point that supporters of the ‘free market’ misunderstand its direct inequality effects to the majority of our people.   

It is a reality that one can argue is an inverted ‘class’ issue.  With the traditional 'comprador bourgeoisie' (the property/money/production owners as inherited from colonialism) forming an alliance with the middle class, workers and peasantry against a state which believes in exactly the same thing. Except using a different methodology called ‘state capitalism’.  With the anticipated end result being the same.  That is the enrichment of the already rich and the continued impoverishment of the already poor in our society.   Even with the anticipation of trickle-down economics and misunderstanding the fact that inflation affects all currencies.  Particularly in their countries of origin, as is the case with the United States economy and dollar at the moment.  Or in the wake of the now economically globalised Russia-Ukraine outright war.

Let me return to the issue of ‘demonstrating’ free market, business and economic knowledge in everyday political conversations in Zimbabwe. Bearing in mind that even as Shimmer Chnodya wrote in his epic novel 'Harvest of Thorns' on how his book's main character's father should have been the minister of finance based on how he juggled his salary, every Zimbabwean in times of economic crisis becomes a finance and business expert. 

In a majority of cases this stems from formal education and/or experience.  Historically as it relates to the Economic Structural Adjustment (ESAP) years between 1989-1999.   In this somewhat dismissed historical period we were taught to assume that private capital and 'free market' trickle-down economics were the panacea to our social and economic challenges as a country.  By way of consumer culture and formally by way of what was then the equivalent of what we now refer to as Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)  education models. In the 1990s through to the first decade of the new millennium we had a cultural and education discourse that reflected free market and ease of doing business as again the total solution to our problems. We were all encouraged to do business related degrees or diplomas. Even at postgraduate level. Also at the height of the most contradictory 'free market'  government policy that was the Fast Track Land Reform Programme (one that I know global private capital considers Zimbabwe's original modern day sin). 

This has directly impacted our national consciousness. More so during the economic crisis that was the 2008-2010 period until the dollarization period that was introduced before the inclusive government was formed.

Our reaction to the latter has not and will not easily be changed.  We welcomed the ‘free market’ knowledge system that it expanded.  Not only in relation to Chicago School type of economics but also how to manipulate it individually (with or without formal financial education).  Especially where it was about foreign currency exchange as enabled by the then and now current Reserve Bank leaders as well as private companies.

So the dominant and populist national consciousness narrative is highly materialistic and also pro-global (not local) private capital. As aided by the current government despite its claims of nationalism.  And amazingly finds common ground between the business and labour sectors of our society.  Especially based on neoliberal assumptions of what is best practice about currency and exchange rates.  Inclusive of listings on international stock exchanges and transferring financial capital to them without reinvesting in the country. 

In the final analysis we need to rethink the relationship between government and private capital (global and local).  Including requesting an answer to four questions as to, “Who holds whom to ransom? And Why? For Whom? For What?”

Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com) 

 

 

 

 

Rising Above Religion in Zimbabwe’s Politics.

By Takura Zhangazha*

Religion has always been integral to Zimbabwe’s national consciousness.  Historically and in the contemporary.  From what is widely accepted as fact, the majority of Zimbabwe’s liberation heroes and leaders had religious backgrounds.  From Mbuya Nehanda, Lobengula, Chaminuka through to our modern nationalists the prospect of a better Zimbabwe had a narrative embedded in religious parlance. Initially based on African traditional perceptions of what links everyday existence and the afterlife through to the missionary Christian education as linked to colonialist hegemony, the ideal society appears to have been based on one or the other religious philosophy.  Based either on identity or assumptions of modern colonial modern progress. Especially via missionary education 

It is as contradictory as it can be considered an oxymoron.  More so when in our liberation struggle we mixed the two to good successful effect.  The missionary educated liberation leaders, the spirit mediums and the socialist trained comrades combined in order to win the country from minority settler government. 

The ideological result was almost a combination of everything.  History met with modern nationalism and both met with African Traditional Values and Christianity.  A general interaction that is still playing out today.  With African traditional religion ironically playing an abstract limited role even after independence. Particularly in relation to Christianity in its three major forms, at least as defined by historical developments in the global north.  These formats being, Orthodox (established churches such as the Catholic, Anglican or Methodist church institutions), Pentecostal (as imported from the United States of America) and with reference to our context, African Pentecostalism (as hybrid versions of the latter but led by Black Africans).

But this is not a write up on the history of religion in Zimbabwe. What is more significant is the reality of its occurrence among us.  And how it has had a fundamental impact on our assumptions of a national consciousness. Particularly one we would want to consider progressive. 

Our national politicians have fallen over themselves seeking endorsements from religious organisations.  Not only for electoral purposes but also as validation for their national political leadership. Both technically and spiritually. 

What they inadvertently do in their search either for votes or validation is that they promote a continuing ambiguity between religion and secular politics.  And this is understandable for comrades that are not visionary about the future of the country.  It remains the easier option to harness religious sentiment to a specific electoral campaign.

Yet it misses the key point of the historical importance of religion in a national consciousness that should not remain static.  We must always recognize the ideological and value laden role of both African traditional religion and Christianity in the historical fact of our liberation.  Our challenge is however the fact that we should stop instrumentalising/using desires for faith for political purposes.  Especially for ephemeral political purposes such as elections. 

But it’s a reality that we know we have to live with because churches/religions, whatever their denominations are essentially a reflection of corporate entities and have historically always been embedded with the state and private capital in creating a specific version of a reality that we eventually, even if we wanted to resist, we cannot.  All because it is what Gramsci referred to as a hegemony.  We can only resist it individually.  Or in collectives that still have limited impact on the state of affairs in our national political economy. 

What is important however is the fact of the need for us to begin to question the toxic mix of politics and religion that appears to be gaining credence in our national consciousness.  Whereas religion provided an ideological base for our liberation struggle, it is no longer enough that we fail to expand it to a newer critical national consciousness.  Based on the same said history.

And there are three key points that I would like to conclude by.  The first being that religion helps in forming an ‘other regarding’ consciousness. And in most religions, the ‘family is considered the ‘basic unit of society’. This means while we consider family as fundamental to our existence, it remains important that we understand that we all have families and therefore we need to be a holistic national family.  And therefore look after each other. 

The second key point is that religion is not static.  Churches have split and prophets have been accused of varying criminal acts.  Religious philosophies have changed over time.  But it is important to continue to separate religion and politics.  And retain the value of a secular state as beneficial to everyone.  Mixing religion and politics has added political expediency but it generally does not end well. 

Finally, we need to stop being abstract about our political economic realities.  There is no religious book that will solve our problems.  No matter how much we pray.  In whatever faith. Or with whatever leader who shares our specific faith. 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)